Susan Nicholson case - heartbreaking

[HeatedCatFurniture]

I've read bits about this before but this article sets it all out in detail.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/aug/28/the-police-knew-another-girl-had-died-in-his-bed-robert-trigg-susan-nicholson

It's appalling. Those poor women, those poor families - and that elderly couple, spending years and £££ bashing their heads against a brick wall of indifference from the police.

And so many of the officers named in the article are women, too.

But his previous partner had died, at home. This would have been on the system What system?

because death at home immediately means a post mortem. It was a slack and lazy gathering of evidence Not always it doesn't. In this case there was a PM on his previous partner which stated she died of an aneurysm. And that is not evidence of anything except that a previous partner died.

Suspicion of murder? With what evidence?

Bloody hell. I had always thought of the police as generally good guys, doing the very best they can under really difficult circumstances.

Rod is effectively disabusing me of these naive views.

Rod is effectively disabusing me of these naive views.

How? By pointing out that the law isn't that simple? By showing the fault lay with a poorly performed post mortem? Or for having the audacity to argue with feminists?

My hometown. Those poor parents.

Somehow I'd expect more of a willingness to look at what went wrong and what could be improved for future when someone nearly gets away with murder twice. Clearly that's asking too much.

Quite.

But once again, the report revealed a little more. The report, by DS Ruth Eady, revealed that one of the officers in attendance – PC Darren Milledge – had been reprimanded for producing a poor scene log when guarding the initial scene. In the log, he names only one paramedic as being present, and fails to record that Trigg and his brother were there.

To the Skeltons’ astonishment, the report also revealed that Milledge had been part of the initial response to Devlin’s death five years previously. The coroner’s officer on Nicholson’s case, responsible for liaising with the police, had also been assigned to the Devlin case.

So, the police officer who had been part of the initial response to one of Trigg's partner's death, was present at the second and failed to adequately log the scene, an astoundingly incurious chap, this Milledge. Ditto the coroner's officer involved.

The man's history wasn't taken into account, even by those in authority who had investigated the previous death he was involved in. The family was disregarded. Common sense wasn't used or when it was, was overruled. Red flags were shrugged at.

The pathologist having wrongly assessed, the police just... well downed tools really.

Yep. Rod, if you don't like the police being criticised, best find a different thread, eh?

Having said that, the fault for the death of Susan Nicholson rests with Trigg and hopefully, as with every other time a woman is murdered by her partner or ex, lessons will be learned.

It'll be interesting to.see what the reviews turn up.

So, the police officer who had been part of the initial response to one of Trigg's partner's death, was present at the second and failed to adequately log the scene, an astoundingly incurious chap, this Milledge. Ditto the coroner's officer involved.

It would seem that curiosity was in short supply in this investigation.

I'm not a feminist. Not particularly. I posted in this section, just because I saw the thread on active convo's. I posted because this guardian article highlights 'poor practice'.

Of which there have been many, in many different police forces, that have come to light in recent years.

Or do you disagree?

Yep. Rod, if you don't like the police being criticised, best find a different thread, eh?

I have no problem with criticism. I have a problem with people who have absolutely no idea, determining where it went wrong on the back of a newspaper article.

It's shocking that her parents have had to do this to get justice. In their 70s/80s. Reminds me of the grandparents of the little girl who was murdered by her stepdad/mum's partner, who had told the court not to put the grandchild in the parents care. Sorry I can't remember the names.

I used to work for the police. I left because many of their attitudes to DV were fucking shocking. So many shoddy investigations.

They can make excuses all they want but it's an institutional problem.

I cannot believe that a police officer was in attendance after both murders and didn't recognise Trigg's face/name. I'm a teacher and I'd recognise any one of my ex students, even though they're now adults.

Rod, you take no responsibility. For the police mistakes.
yes the pathologist was wrong. So was the judge. So were many of the police officers. So were the 3 people that did the investigations. Mistakes made by all of them.

DI Sarah Barrett
coroner, Michael Kendall
chief constable of Sussex police, Martin Richards
IPCC
DCI David Wardley-Wilkins,
DI Emma Brice
DS Ruth Eady

the list goes on and on of just about everyone involved in this case making numerable mistakes.

Rod is saying that we are all all have no idea, but base our disapproval on a newspaper article.
Yes. we are.
What else to you expect joe public to do?

Do you have any re-dress to our general complaints that this was badly handled?

Would you claim that it was not poor practice, but 'good practice'? Do you believe procedures and guidelines were properly followed.

Would you present this, (as a golden case to highlight your best features in your brochure

as one of the Sussex's best handled cases? Are you proud of it?

I suspect not.

Can you not understand, Rod, how angry we are at this? Her poor parents shouldn't have been the one driving this. The police officer at the scene couldn't understand why he wasn't arrested.

Today 11:21 Rodhullstvaerial

Yep. Rod, if you don't like the police being criticised, best find a different thread, eh?

"I have no problem with criticism. I have a problem with people who have absolutely no idea, determining where it went wrong on the back of a newspaper article."

So, leaving the article aside, where do you think it went wrong?

That officer needs sacking. If I met an ugly git with a dead wife and the surname Trigg once in my life I wouldn't forget. This numpty did it twice.

I'm glad at least the Asst Chief Constable of Sussex police force thinks they may have cocked up, given I doubt he'll have authorised 3 separate reviews if he thought there wasn't a case to answer

Still wondering where Rod thinks it all went wrong.

Suspicion of murder? With what evidence?

Reasonable grounds for previous acts and behaviour.

Same Datun.

Would be interesting to know if the pathologist was aware of the previous death when he/she did the post mortem, or was that info only known by the (incompetent) police?